Low-cost sensor-integrated 3D-printed personalized prosthetic hands for children with amniotic band syndrome: A case study in sensing pressure distribution on an anatomical human-machine interface (AHMI) using 3D-printed conformal electrode arrays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interfacing anatomically conformal electronic components, such as sensors, with biology is central to the creation of next-generation wearable systems for health care and human augmentation applications. Thus, there is a need to establish computer-aided design and manufacturing methods for producing personalized anatomically conformal systems, such as wearable devices and human-machine interfaces (HMIs). Here, we show that a three-dimensional (3D) scanning and 3D printing process enabled the design and fabrication of a sensor-integrated anatomical human-machine interface (AHMI) in the form of personalized prosthetic hands that contain anatomically conformal electrode arrays for children affected by amniotic band syndrome, a common birth defect. A methodology for identifying optimal scanning parameters was identified based on local and global metrics of registered point cloud data quality. This method identified an optimal rotational angle step size between adjacent 3D scans. The sensitivity of the optimization process to variations in organic shape (i.e., geometry) was examined by testing other anatomical structures, including a foot, an ear, and a porcine kidney. We found that personalization of the prosthetic interface increased the tissue-prosthesis contact area by 408% relative to the non-personalized devices. Conformal 3D printing of carbon nanotube-based polymer inks across the personalized AHMI facilitated the integration of electronic components, specifically, conformal sensor arrays for measuring the pressure distribution across the AHMI (i.e., the tissue-prosthesis interface). We found that the pressure across the AHMI exhibited a non-uniform distribution and became redistributed upon activation of the prosthetic hand's grasping action. Overall, this work shows that the integration of 3D scanning and 3D printing processes offers the ability to design and fabricate wearable systems that contain sensor-integrated AHMIs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".